Total body irradiation delivered using a dedicated Co-60 TBI unit: Evaluation of dosimetric uniformity and dose verification.

This work presents the dosimetric characteristics of Total Body Irradiation (TBI) delivered using a dedicated Co-60 TBI unit. We demonstrate the ability to deliver a uniform dose to the entire patient without the need for a beam spoiler or patient-specific compensation. Full dose distributions are calculated using an in-house Monte Carlo treatment planning system, and cumulative dose distributions are created by deforming the dose distributions within two different patient orientations. Sample dose distributions and profiles are provided to illustrate the plan characteristics, and dose and DVH statistics are provided for a heterogeneous cohort of patients. The patient cohort includes adult and pediatric patients with a range of 132-198 cm in length and 16.5-37.5 cm in anterior-posterior thickness. With the exception of the lungs, a uniform dose of 12 Gy is delivered to the patient with nearly the entire volume receiving a dose within 10% of the prescription dose. Mean lung doses (MLDs) are maintained below the estimated threshold for radiation pneumonitis, with MLDs ranging from 7.3 to 9.3 Gy (estimated equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2 ) of 6.2-8.5 Gy). Dose uniformity is demonstrated across five anatomical locations within the patient for which mean doses are all within 3.1% of the prescription dose. In-vivo dosimetry demonstrates excellent agreement between measured and calculated doses, with 78% of measurements within ±5% of the calculated dose and 99% within ±10%. These results demonstrate a state-of-the-art TBI planning and delivery system using a dedicated TBI unit and hybrid in-house and commercial planning techniques which provide comprehensive dosimetric data for TBI treatment plans that are accurately verified using in-vivo dosimetry.

Considerations for intensity modulated total body or total marrow and lymphoid irradiation.

We compiled a sampling of the treatment techniques of intensity-modulated total body irradiation, total marrow irradiation and total marrow and lymphoid irradiation utilized by several centers across North America and Europe. This manuscript does not serve as a consensus guideline, but rather is meant to serve as a convenient reference for centers that are considering starting an intensity-modulated program.

Introduction to concept inventories for medical physics education.

Concept inventories are multiple choice exams designed with the intention to test core concepts on specific subjects and evaluate common misconceptions. These tests serve as a useful tool in the classroom to assess value added by the instructor's educational methods and to better understand how students learn. They can provide educators with a method to evaluate their current teaching strategies and to make modifications that enhance student learning and ultimately elevate the quality of medical physics education. The use of concept inventories in introductory college physics courses revealed important gaps in conceptual understanding of physics by undergraduate students and motivated a shift of physics teaching towards more effective methods, such as active learning techniques. The goal of this review is to introduce medical physicists to concept inventories as educational evaluation tools and discuss potential applications to medical physics education by development through multi-institutional collaboration.

Results of a Multi-Disciplinary and Multi-Institutional Pilot Creating High-Yield Physics Educational Content (Hi-Phy).

Purpose: The quality of medical physics education is heterogenous across training programs, despite its importance in radiation oncology (RO) residency training. We present the results of a pilot series of free high-yield physics educational videos covering 4 topics chosen from the American Society for Radiation Oncology core curriculum. Methods and materials: Scripting and storyboarding of videos were iterative processes performed by 2 ROs and 6 medical physicists, with animations created by a university broadcasting specialist. Current RO residents and those who had graduated after 2018 were recruited through social media and e-mail with an aim of 60 participants. Two validated surveys were adapted for use and were completed after each video as well as a final overall assessment. Content was released sequentially after completion of the survey instruments for each prior video. All videos were created and released within 1 year of project initiation with a duration of 9 to 11 minutes. Results: There were 169 enrollees for the pilot from across the world, 211% of the targeted cohort size. Of these, 154 met eligibility criteria and received the first video. One hundred eight enrollees initiated the series and 85 completed the pilot, resulting in a 78% completion rate. Participants reported improved understanding and confidence applying the knowledge learned in the videos (median score 4 out of 5). All participants reported that the use of graphic animation improved understanding across all videos. Ninety-three percent agreed with a need for additional resources geared specifically toward RO residents and 100% would recommend these videos to other residents. Use metrics revealed the average watch time was 7 minutes (range, 6:17-7:15). Conclusions: The high-yield educational physics video pilot series was successful in developing videos that were effective in teaching RO physics concepts.

Lessons Learned From an Educational Pilot: High-Yield Physics Videos for Radiation Oncology Residents.

Radiation oncology is uniquely poised to benefit from the development of remote learning tools, given the need for mastery of often challenging basic science topics, as well as the interprogram heterogeneity of resident educational quality. Our team successfully created and disseminated 4 high-yield animated physics educational videos through the collaboration of radiation oncologists, medical physicists, and a graphic design specialist. This is a unique process requiring significant intellectual, monetary, and time capital. In this article, we describe important lessons learned throughout this process, in hopes that others will learn from our experience, applying the following concepts to their own digital content creation. These lessons include (1) playing to your teammates' strengths and personalizing tasks, rather than equally dividing work; (2) anticipating animations before and during script writing; (3) developing multiple routes of communication and being open to which one works best for your team; and (4) discussing funding up front and collaborating within an affiliated institution or company for graphic design to alleviate the financial stress of such endeavors.

Proton versus photon radiation therapy: A clinical review.

While proton radiation therapy offers substantially better dose distribution characteristics than photon radiation therapy in certain clinical applications, data demonstrating a quantifiable clinical advantage is still needed for many treatment sites. Unfortunately, the number of patients treated with proton radiation therapy is still comparatively small, in some part due to the lack of evidence of clear benefits over lower-cost photon-based treatments. This review is designed to present the comparative clinical outcomes between proton and photon therapies, and to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of proton radiation therapy.

Resource Allocations for Common Radiation Oncology Procedures.

PURPOSE: Radiation Oncology is a complex, resource-intensive discipline. The complexity of the radiation oncology treatment process has increased significantly in recent years with the introduction of more advanced imaging, planning, and treatment delivery technology and enhanced use of multidisciplinary care paths. We conducted a multi-institutional study to estimate the average time by functional unit for a wide range of modern radiation oncology treatment regimens. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Structured process mapping was performed for 24 treatment categories, and average time estimates for 6 functional groups were obtained for each process step through consultation with the full clinical team at each institution. Six geographically dispersed institutions participated in the study. Significant effort was invested in aggregate data analysis and clarification of assumptions. RESULTS: The findings show significant variability in the resources expended for many treatment categories as well as the distribution of workload between functional units. Major factors in the variability include the rate of adoption of hypofractionation in external beam therapy, adoption of automation tools and standardization, and the transition to multimodality image-based planning in brachytherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The data obtained from this study may be useful in designing institution-specific staffing models appropriate to the scope of radiation therapy services provided at each institution.

Quality and Safety Considerations in Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy: An ASTRO Safety White Paper Update.

PURPOSE: This updated report on intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is part of a series of consensus-based white papers previously published by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) addressing patient safety. Since the first white papers were published, IMRT went from widespread use to now being the main delivery technique for many treatment sites. IMRT enables higher radiation doses to be delivered to more precise targets while minimizing the dose to uninvolved normal tissue. Due to the associated complexity, IMRT requires additional planning and safety checks before treatment begins and, therefore, quality and safety considerations for this technique remain important areas of focus. METHODS AND MATERIALS: ASTRO convened an interdisciplinary task force to assess the original IMRT white paper and update content where appropriate. Recommendations were created using a consensus-building methodology, and task force members indicated their level of agreement based on a 5-point Likert scale, from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." A prespecified threshold of ≥75% of raters who select "strongly agree" or "agree" indicated consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This IMRT white paper primarily focuses on quality and safety processes in planning and delivery. Building on the prior version, this consensus paper incorporates revised and new guidance documents and technology updates. IMRT requires an interdisciplinary team-based approach, staffed by appropriately trained individuals as well as significant personnel resources, specialized technology, and implementation time. A comprehensive quality assurance program must be developed, using established guidance, to ensure IMRT is performed in a safe and effective manner. Patient safety in the delivery of IMRT is everyone's responsibility, and professional organizations, regulators, vendors, and end-users must work together to ensure the highest levels of safety.

Development of a United States Radiation Oncology Curricular Framework: A Stakeholder Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: A United States (US) radiation oncology curriculum, developed using best practices for curriculum inquiry, is needed to guide residency education and qualifying examinations. Competency-based training, including entrustable professional activities (EPAs), provides an outcomes-based approach to modern graduate medical education. This study aimed to define US radiation oncology EPAs and curricular content domains using a deliberative process with input from multiple stakeholder groups. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group Core Curriculum Project Leadership Committee developed initial content domains and EPAs. Following recruitment of stakeholders, a Delphi process was used to achieve consensus. In the first round, content domains and EPAs were reviewed for inclusion and exclusion, clarity, time allocation (content domains), and level of training (EPAs). Participants submitted additional content domains and EPAs for consideration. Any content domains or EPAs 1 standard deviation below the median for inclusion and exclusion underwent Leadership Committee review. All participants completing the first Delphi round were invited to the second round. Percent curriculum time allocated for content domains and a single subdomain were finalized. New EPAs or EPAs undergoing major revisions were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 186 participants representing diverse stakeholder groups participated. One hundred fourteen completed the first Delphi round (61.3%). Of 114 invited, 77 participants completed the second round of the Delphi process (67.5%). Overall, 6 of 9 content domains met consensus, 1 content domain was removed, and 2 content domains were combined. Four subdomains of a single content domain were reviewed and met consensus. Consensus on percent time allocated per content domain and subdomain was reached. Of 55 initial EPAs, 52 final EPAs met consensus. CONCLUSIONS: Deliberative curriculum inquiry was successfully used to develop a consensus on US radiation oncology content domains and EPAs. These data can guide the allocation of educational time in training programs, help inform weighting for qualifying examinations, and help guide clinical training and resident assessment.

AAPM Task Group Report 306: Quality control and assurance for tomotherapy: An update to Task Group Report 148.

Since the publication of AAPM Task Group (TG) 148 on quality assurance (QA) for helical tomotherapy, there have been many new developments on the tomotherapy platform involving treatment delivery, on-board imaging options, motion management, and treatment planning systems (TPSs). In response to a need for guidance on quality control (QC) and QA for these technologies, the AAPM Therapy Physics Committee commissioned TG 306 to review these changes and make recommendations related to these technology updates. The specific objectives of this TG were (1) to update, as needed, recommendations on tolerance limits, frequencies and QC/QA testing methodology in TG 148, (2) address the commissioning and necessary QA checks, as a supplement to Medical Physics Practice Guidelines (MPPG) with respect to tomotherapy TPS and (3) to provide risk-based recommendations on the new technology implemented clinically and treatment delivery workflow. Detailed recommendations on QA tests and their tolerance levels are provided for dynamic jaws, binary multileaf collimators, and Synchrony motion management. A subset of TPS commissioning and QA checks in MPPG 5.a. applicable to tomotherapy are recommended. In addition, failure mode and effects analysis has been conducted among TG members to obtain multi-institutional analysis on tomotherapy-related failure modes and their effect ranking.

A Direct Patient-Provider Relationship With the Medical Physicist Reduces Anxiety in Patients Receiving Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: The complex technological processes involved in radiation therapy can be intimidating to patients, causing increased treatment-related anxiety and reduced satisfaction. An intervention was implemented to provide direct consultations between patients and medical physicists to reduce patient anxiety and improve patient satisfaction. A randomized clinical trial was conducted to test the intervention's effect on anxiety, distress, treatment adherence, technical understanding, and satisfaction in patients receiving radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eligible patients were recruited into "intervention" and "standard of care" arms within a phase 2 screening randomized trial. Intervention-arm patients met with a medical physicist who provided technical information and addressed patient questions or concerns at the time of treatment simulation and before the first treatment. In addition to baseline information collected before randomization, participants were surveyed (1) before simulation, (2) before the first treatment, and (3) before the completion of treatment to evaluate the study endpoints. Primary endpoints included patient anxiety and distress. Secondary endpoints included patient treatment adherence, overall satisfaction, and technical understanding of treatment. Patients in the intervention arm were surveyed before and after each physicist meeting. RESULTS: Participant anxiety was significantly reduced in the intervention arm (difference, -0.29; 95% confidence interval, -0.57 to -0.02; P = .038). No differences in distress or treatment adherence were observed between groups. Although measures of technical understanding and satisfaction were evaluated as exploratory objectives, participants in the intervention group were more likely to feel that technical aspects of treatment were adequately explained (difference, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-1.54), and all measures of technical understanding and satisfaction were considerably higher in the intervention group at the time of the first visit. CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of a direct patient-provider relationship with the medical physicist reduced anxiety in patients receiving radiation therapy. In addition, increases in patient understanding of the technical aspects of care and in satisfaction were observed at the initiation of treatment.

AAPM Report 373: The content, structure, and value of the Professional Doctorate in Medical Physics (DMP).

The Professional Doctorate in Medical Physics (DMP) was originally conceived as a solution to the shortage of medical physics residency training positions. While this shortage has now been largely satisfied through conventional residency training positions, the DMP has expanded to multiple institutions and grown into an educational pathway that provides specialized clinical training and extends well beyond the creation of additional training spots. As such, it is important to reevaluate the purpose and the value of the DMP. Additionally, it is important to outline the defining characteristics of the DMP to assure that all existing and future programs provide this anticipated value. Since the formation and subsequent accreditation of the first DMP program in 2009-2010, four additional programs have been created and accredited. However, no guidelines have yet been recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. CAMPEP accreditation of these programs has thus far been based only on the respective graduate and residency program standards. This allows the development and operation of DMP programs which contain only the requisite Master of Science (MS) coursework and a 2-year clinical training program. Since the MS plus 2-year residency pathway already exists, this form of DMP does not provide added value, and one may question why this existing pathway should be considered a doctorate. Not only do we, as a profession, need to outline the defining characteristics of the DMP, we need to carefully evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of this pathway within our education and training infrastructure. The aims of this report from the Working Group on the Professional Doctorate Degree for Medical Physicists (WGPDMP) are to (1) describe the current state of the DMP within the profession, (2) make recommendations on the structure and content of the DMP for existing and new DMP programs, and (3) evaluate the value of the DMP to the profession of medical physics.

AAPM Task Group 298: Recommendations on certificate program/alternative pathway candidate education and training.

Entry into the field of clinical medical physics is most commonly accomplished through the completion of a Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Educational Programs (CAMPEP)-accredited graduate and residency program. To allow a mechanism to bring valuable expertise from other disciplines into clinical practice in medical physics, an "alternative pathway" approach was also established. To ensure those trainees who have completed a doctoral degree in physics or a related discipline have the appropriate background and didactic training in medical physics, certificate programs and a CAMPEP-accreditation process for these programs were initiated. However, medical physics-specific didactic, research, and clinical exposure of those entering medical physics residencies from these certificate programs is often comparatively modest when evaluated against individuals holding Master's and/or Doctoral degrees in CAMPEP-accredited graduate programs. In 2016, the AAPM approved the formation of Task Group (TG) 298, "Alternative Pathway Candidate Education and Training." The TG was charged with reviewing previous published recommendations for alternative pathway candidates and developing recommendations on the appropriate education and training of these candidates. This manuscript is a summary of the AAPM TG 298 report.

Evaluation of Dose Accuracy in the Near-Surface Region for Whole Breast Irradiation Techniques in a Multi-institutional Consortium.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of dose calculations in the near-surface region for different treatment planning systems (TPSs), treatment techniques, and energies to improve clinical decisions for patients receiving whole breast irradiation (WBI). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A portable custom breast phantom was designed for dose measurements in the near-surface regions. Treatment plans of varying complexities were created at 8 institutions using 4 different TPSs on an anonymized patient data set (50 Gy in 25 fractions) and peer reviewed by participants. The plans were recalculated on the phantom data set. The phantom was aligned with predetermined shifts and laser marks or cone beam computed tomography, and the irradiation was performed using a variety of linear accelerators at the participating institutions. Dose was measured with radiochromic film placed at 0.5 and 1.0 cm depth and 3 locations per depth within the phantom. The film was scanned and analyzed >24 hours postirradiation. RESULTS: The percentage difference between the mean of the measured and calculated dose across the participating centers was -0.2 % ± 2.9%, with 95% of measurements within 6% agreement. No significant differences were found between the mean of the calculated and measured dose for all TPSs, treatment techniques, and energies at all depths and laterality investigated. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the mean of measured dose and the prescription dose of 2 Gy per fraction. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that dose calculations for clinically relevant WBI plans are accurate to within 6% of measurements in the near-surface region for various complexities, TPSs, linear accelerators, and beam energies. This work lays the necessary foundation for future studies investigating the correlation between near-surface dose and acute skin toxicities.

A bi-institutional multi-disciplinary failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for a Co-60 based total body irradiation technique.

BACKGROUND: We aim to assess the risks associated with total body irradiation (TBI) delivered using a commercial dedicated Co-60 irradiator, and to evaluate inter-institutional and inter-professional variations in the estimation of these risks. METHODS: A failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) was generated using guidance from the AAPM TG-100 report for quantitative estimation of prospective risk metrics. Thirteen radiation oncology professionals from two institutions rated possible failure modes (FMs) for occurrence (O), severity (S), and detectability (D) indices to generate a risk priority number (RPN). The FMs were ranked by descending RPN value. Absolute gross differences (AGD) in resulting RPN values and Jaccard Index (JI; for the top 20 FMs) were calculated. The results were compared between professions and institutions. RESULTS: A total of 87 potential FMs (57, 15, 10, 3, and 2 for treatment, quality assurance, planning, simulation, and logistics respectively) were identified and ranked, with individual RPN ranging between 1-420 and mean RPN values ranging between 6 and 74. The two institutions shared 6 of their respective top 20 FMs. For various institutional and professional comparison pairs, the number of common FMs in the top 20 FMs ranged from 6 to 13, with JI values of 18-48%. For the top 20 FMs, the trend in inter-professional variability was institution-specific. The mean AGD values ranged between 12.5 and 74.5 for various comparison pairs. AGD values differed the most for medical physicists (MPs) in comparison to other specialties i.e. radiation oncologists (ROs) and radiation therapists (RTs) [MPs-vs-ROs: 36.3 (standard deviation SD = 34.1); MPs-vs-RTs: 41.2 (SD = 37.9); ROs-vs-RTs: 12.5 (SD = 10.8)]. Trends in inter-professional AGD values were similar for both institutions. CONCLUSION: This inter-institutional comparison provides prospective risk analysis for a new treatment delivery unit and illustrates the institution-specific nature of FM prioritization, primarily due to operational differences. Despite being subjective in nature, the FMEA is a valuable tool to ensure the identification of the most significant risks, particularly when implementing a novel treatment modality. The creation of a bi-institutional, multidisciplinary FMEA for this unique TBI technique has not only helped identify potential risks but also served as an opportunity to evaluate clinical and safety practices from the perspective of both multiple professional roles and different institutions.